2025:UHC:5554-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB No.520 of 2018 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. 3. Petitioner pursued MBBS Course on subsidised fees from Government Medical College, Haldwani, District Nainital, between 2009-14 by executing a bond that she will serve in remote hill areas of the State of Uttarakhand for a minimum period of five years. 4. Upon successful completion of MBBS Course, petitioner was given contractual appointment on 30.06.2014 as Medical Officer (Contract) as per the bond and she joined duty as Medical Officer (Contract) at Primary Health Centre, Gangolihat, District Pithoragarh on 26.07.2014. Petitioner served in Primary Health Centre Gangolihat, District Pithoragarh only till 01.04.2015. Petitioner was thereafter selected for regular appointment as Medical Officer by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission and, she joined as regular Medical Officer at Government Allopathy Hospital, Dinga, District Almora on 07.04.2015. 5. On 08.07.2015, petitioner tendered resignation from the post of Medical Officer for pursuing M.D. Pathology Course, which she completed in 2018 and thereafter she submitted joining report in Government Allopathy Hospital Dinga, District Almora on 25.07.2018, however, she was refused joining. 2025:UHC:5554-DB Vide order dated 19.09.2018, Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttarakhand asked petitioner to join duties as Medical Officer on contract in terms of the bond, at District Hospital, Almora. 6. Petitioner has challenged order dated 19.09.2018 passed by Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttarakhand on the ground that since she was appointed on regular basis through Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, therefore, asking her to serve on contract for remaining period of the bond is unjust and arbitrary. 7. On 23.06.2025, learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions in the matter. 8. Today, learned State Counsel has produced in Court the written instructions, with compilation of all relevant documents received from Directorate, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttarakhand, which are taken on record. At page 25 of the compilation, there is an order in which it is mentioned that services of 41 persons, who were appointed as Medical Officer on the recommendation of Uttarakhand Public Service Commission in the year 2015, have been terminated because they absented from duty without any intimation, during the period of probation. Petitioner’s name figures at serial no.25 of the said order which according to learned State Counsel was issued by Secretary, Medical Health on 06.05.2020. 9. Learned State Counsel has drawn our attention to another order dated 26.05.2020 issued by Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttarakhand whereby petitioner was permitted to join duties as 2025:UHC:5554-DB Pathologist, on first appointment under Chief Medical Officer, Almora. Learned State Counsel submits that petitioner again applied for regular appointment in 2017-18 without disclosing the fact that she is serving as per the bond executed by her and she was successful in getting reappointed. 10. Learned State Counsel submits that since petitioner accepted joining at Almora as new appointee pursuant to order dated 26.05.2020, therefore, petitioner’s claim for benefit of past services is untenable. He submits that since in the order dated 26.05.2020, Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttarakhand had clearly stated that it is first appointment and petitioner has accepted joining in terms of the said order, therefore, she is estopped from claiming benefit of past services. 11. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the order dated 26.05.2020 was never served upon petitioner, therefore, petitioner could not challenge the said order before appropriate forum. 12. Since petitioner’s appointment on probation as Medical Officer in 2015 stood terminated by order dated 06.05.2020, therefore, without challenging the termination order, she cannot seek benefit arising out of appointment which was given to her in 2015. 13. In such view of the matter, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to challenge the termination order, if so, advised. (Subhash Upadhyay,J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 01.07.2025 SS 2025:UHC:5554-DB